Micheal D Higgins dog, Síoda, has passed away. RIP Síoda.

Greyfox wrote: »

The big picture is it's a dog and not a person

Yeah that's it.

Dogs can bridge the gap and common ground that people can"t.

anewme wrote: »

Yeah that's it.

Dogs can bridge the gap and common ground that people can"t.

Ah you can't say that now and withhold the details!

Between what entities did this dog bridge a gap or create common ground?

Cats and mice?

I don't have a problem with this being reported. It did feel a bit odd though when the newscaster said it passed away 'after a short illness'.

Best pup.

anewme wrote: »

No offence Yosser Hughes, but given you base yourself on an anti establishment character from 1982, this rant about dictators would maybe belong fado, fado, back in that era and might need to see how this century is panning out.

Yes and Caligula wasn't born yesterday either. My username is irrelevant but well done on recognising the character.Why would I take offence?
It doesn't take away one iota from my argument. Emoting and attaching ridiculous significance to the death of a dog says more about you than me.
Are you saying there are no dictators today? Some of whom Comrade Higgins is an admirer.
The more hysterical on boards regard the Donald as one .:rolleyes:

yosser hughes wrote: »

Yes and Caligula wasn't born yesterday either. My username is irrelevant but well done on recognising the character.Why would I take offence?
It doesn't take away one iota from my argument. Emoting and attaching ridiculous significance to the death of a dog says more about you than me.
Are you saying there are no dictators today? Some of whom Comrade Higgins is an admirer.
The more hysterical on boards regard the Donald as one .:rolleyes:

No what it actually indicates is that Yosser Hughes was an angry bitter person in 1982 and it did no good then, its not going to do you any good in 2020 either. Being angry at what others attach value to has no added value to your own life.

Maybe accept that some people value dogs as family members and that is their perrogative. Live and let live.

yosser hughes wrote: »

Yes and Caligula wasn't born yesterday either. My username is irrelevant but well done on recognising the character.Why would I take offence?
It doesn't take away one iota from my argument. Emoting and attaching ridiculous significance to the death of a dog says more about you than me.
Are you saying there are no dictators today? Some of whom Comrade Higgins is an admirer.
The more hysterical on boards regard the Donald as one .:rolleyes:

It says a hell of a lot about you actually.

I know grown men who have openly admitted they cried for weeks after their dog died. One said that he hadn't felt so bad after his elderly boxer died since his mother passed away. I know a family that got the priest around because they were holding a wake for their dog after she died of liver cancer. (religion is not my cup of tea, but it was theirs). Right now I know a family that are distraught because their dog got knocked over and died at the weekend. To these people they have lost a family member.

Dogs develop empathy in children, look at how autism assistance dogs help autistic kids with their needs. A lot of old people who live alone depend on their pets for company, dogs around the world are used to work, hunt, shepherd, guard and assist in various ways, and every owner get attached to them, whatever the role they play.

To display such disdain and contempt for dog owners, who cherish their pets just shows the character, or rather, lack of character that you display in your posts.

yosser hughes wrote: »

Well that's me told. .
Despite your pious and sanctimonious assertions, I fully understand that people become attached to dogs and are sad when they die. I was myself as a child, we had several dogs over the years.
However, elevating a dog to ambassadorial status and in your example; of a family calling a priest and holding a wake! Come on!
You know nothing about me or my 'character'. Your accusations seem a tad harsh. Water off a duck's back to me though. If it makes you feel better I suppose, I'm happy you can demonise someone like me without knowing me, but you're the nice guy right?

I'm not a guy.

I refer to the lack of character on display in your posts.

yosser hughes wrote: »

This thread is illuminating, I must say. The doggy craze in this country is out of control; anthropomorphism and fake emotion.

What fake emotion? People love their pets. ^^Having a dig for the likes?

Maybe there should be a statue of the dog? Given the esteem it seems to have been held in. It's the kind of thing that dictators do. Michael D. the socialist landlord would definitely go along with that. A giant statue of his dog, or a mausoleum. Kim Jong Un style.
It's easy to see how dictators get away with their shyte for so long. The forelock tuggers love it.
Caligula would blush

Then you refer to the dog as "It" and you emphasise it for the wind up. The dog was a much loved pet, and it is far more acceptable to refer to them by their prefix. But again, showing the lack of character on display for those posters that you are taking issue with.

You refer to Caligula, ancient civilizations often depicted their dogs with statues, Jennings dog, or Anubis, the Egyptian God of death and mummification being the most famous, a lot of the basal breeds that originate in Africa and Asia have been depicted in ancient carvings and statues. Even in modern times, statues of dogs are commonplace, yet you feel it's worth ridiculing.

borderlinemeath wrote: »

I'm not a guy.

You must have been a long time writing your post. Looking up Wiki I suspect. I edited mine to reflect the possibility half an hour before your reply.
The Caligula reference was more a nod to the appointment of his horse to the Senate and Michael D's dog being anointed ambassadorial status. That was obviously lost on you.

anewme wrote: »

So it's pretty clear that the Presidents relationship with his dogs touched many people.

Yep, yesterday it was an State ambassadorial role bestowed on the deceased dog. Today it's been elevated to Saint-hood. I'm quite eager to see what the touched people come up with tomorrow!

Who else knew this thread would go this way?

borderlinemeath wrote: »

It says a hell of a lot about you actually.

I know grown men who have openly admitted they cried for weeks after their dog died. One said that he hadn't felt so bad after his elderly boxer died since his mother passed away. I know a family that got the priest around because they were holding a wake for their dog after she died of liver cancer. (religion is not my cup of tea, but it was theirs). Right now I know a family that are distraught because their dog got knocked over and died at the weekend. To these people they have lost a family member.

Dogs develop empathy in children, look at how autism assistance dogs help autistic kids with their needs. A lot of old people who live alone depend on their pets for company, dogs around the world are used to work, hunt, shepherd, guard and assist in various ways, and every owner get attached to them, whatever the role they play.

To display such disdain and contempt for dog owners, who cherish their pets just shows the character, or rather, lack of character that you display in your posts.

Yup. We waked our last dog when she passed. It was very comforting. Lots of neighbours dropped in for sandwiches and wine, and some recounted stories about how she used to drop into them for treats (we'd no idea she was even able to sneak out). She had this whole other life we didn't know about! For us, the wake was about having the comfort of family and friends at a time when we were in mourning and it really helped. I don't see how that would be a problem for anyone else - it isn't their business and if they don't agree with it sure can't they just ignore it? It isn't like we forced anyone to go!

Some people are dog people and some aren't, but I don't get why non dog people have to have a go at those of us who do value them. It takes nothing from them if we mourn the loss of our companion and it's not their prerogative to prescribe how we mourn either.

On the statue, it's long been on my bucket list to see the Hachikō statue in Tokyo - the ultimate symbol of the relationship between people and their dogs!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sure what about it? Isn't it nice that there are people who care enough to write about her passing? It shows empathy and kindness. The world is hard enough these days.

Not really, it's just one of the many examples of the media reporting on irrelevant trash news rather than actual news and trash news deserves to be criticised. A dog dying is sad for the owners but theirs no need to report it to thousands of people who never met the dog as it is just someone elses dog.

Greyfox wrote: »

Not really, it's just one of the many examples of the media reporting on irrelevant trash news rather than actual news and trash news deserves to be criticised. A dog dying is sad for the owners but theirs no need to report it to thousands of people who never met the dog as it is just someone elses dog.

I think the view on whether news is "relevant" is an entirely subjective one to be fair. What's news for one person, might be of little consequence to another. I care little about celebrity reproduction or whether pubs re-open, yet I cannot seem to avoid these two issues for some reason We are free to ignore any news which we feel is irrelevant. I wouldn't like to live in a world where the only permitted news items are distilled down to those which will have immediate, significant, life or death or other implications for me! Sometimes, it's nice to just read about something out of interest